We will discuss grant proposals at a later meeting.

Discussion of laptop proposal lists. Committee received lists from Library and Fine Arts.

Lee read the list from Science:
· Regarding required laptop purchase: Biology is favorable, though not thrilled. Math is not supportive.
· Suggested using carted laptops as a trial to see how much they are used. Check the cost benefit before implementing requirement.
· Regarding wireless network: Phase in slowly as needed. Technology will improve later. Suggested using carted laptops.
· Regarding portal: Most faculty in the discussion were unclear as to exactly what a portal is. If it improves on-campus speed, then faculty favor it. However, more information is needed.
· Regarding Technology Resource Center: Main concern is the location of the IMTSs. If they will be moved to the Resource Center, the proposal is not supported.
· Regarding one-card system: It will be very useful. If it will ultimately be used for faculty offices, faculty want keys to bypass the system.

A lot of questions and concerns have been brought to ITS. They are working through them, though not on an individual basis. The laptop proposal is still in the discussion phase. ITS will offer a preliminary response to most questions by the end of the semester. They will look at other campuses this summer and continue the discussion in the fall. ITS wants a shared vision of student computing needs. They also want to expand and experiment with laptops-not jump in.

Question of budget priorities: ITS has budget to experiment with technology.

Regarding computer labs:
· The Carnegie lab will be removed to make room for the academic support office expansion. ARH121 academic support office will become two faculty offices.
· The Cowles lab will be removed so that the Kosher kitchen may be expanded.
· Removal of these two labs will result in 15 systems being removed. There are currently 170-180 systems on campus plus the MATHlan and departmental systems. It will not be a significant loss.
· Goodnow third floor will be upgraded.
· ITS will compensate as much as possible for loss of systems. The number of systems has increased over the past few years through science and library changes.
· Students now have over 800 computers on campus, and the number is expected to rise.
· Compared to our peers, we have more computers per student. Dorm lounges have network ports. It is possible to put a hub for wireless computers, whether they are purchased through this initiative or privately.

Jon raised points from the Fine Arts faculty:
· How could technology be used in the classroom? Will it degrade class atmosphere to have access to email, etc., during class?
· Need to come up with benefits of the proposal.

Faculty need more time to see how they will use technology. Many are unsure at this point how they could use it effectively. It may be more wise to experiment with carts first.

The College's commitment to diversity, yet mandating single platform delivers an inconsistent message.

Grinnell values choice and has no mandatory requirements. Students will not be required to carry laptops. It will be up to the faculty to choose to use laptops in their courses.

ITS wants a common infrastructure for the campus, similar to the current network. Notebooks would meet most needs. Public labs would be specialized according to areas they serve.

It is possible to have site licenses so that software is accessible through the network instead of being individually loaded.

A single platform could run most software off of the server. The college currently has approximately 120 packages loaded, representing strong diversity.

ISC will continue discussion at future meetings. The proposal for faculty endorsement will be created later.

There is concern for the degree of faculty input on proposals. It will be helpful to involve faculty as discussion continues.

Should IMTS reports be sent to all faculty? It was suggested to place copies of the document in academic support offices and the library as well as on the web. Invite faculty to supplement points.

Should lists be consolidated? It may be more powerful to have some points repeated. A consolidated list may be created over the summer, keeping individual lists intact as well.

It was suggested that some members of the faculty, including some from ISC, continue to meet with ITS over the summer to discuss the proposal. Should faculty be required to work over the summer?

Bill will poll faculty about summer involvement. It will be beneficial to include a faculty representative from Math.

It is usually best to start small rather than designing a massive project from scratch. Too many things can be missed.

More and more students are bringing their own wireless computers. How can faculty tell if students are typing notes or doing email?

Faculty view may not necessarily agree with the institutional view.

How disruptive is typing noise in class?

Bill will send out link for portal information. It is on IMTS page.

What is Resource Center? How far will one-card system go? Will discuss next meeting with Briscoe on May 9.

Respectfully submitted,

Terri Phipps